석재(碩齋) 윤행임(尹行恁)의 『신호수필(薪湖隨筆)』 경사류(經史類) 해석의 『역(易)』 활용양상과 그 의미 (The Aspects and Significance of Suk-Jae Yoon Haeng-im’s Usage of the 『I Ching』 for the Interpretation of the Confucian Classics and Histories in 『Shinho-Essay』)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 서울대학교 규장각한국학연구원
· 수록지 정보 : 한국문화 / 92호 / 261 ~ 293페이지
· 저자명 : 남윤덕

초록

The I Ching is a central book that Yoon Haeng-im preferred to use, which can show his perspective on the study of Confucian Classics. In his essay Shinho-supil, with the I Ching, Yoon Haeng-im attempted to interpret a variety of Confucian Classics and histories (gyeongsa), such as the Analects, the Mencius, the Great Learning, the Doctrine of the Mean, the Shangshu, the Mao Odes, the Lesser Learning, the Book of Rites, the Zuo zhuan, the Summary of the Nineteen Histories, the Tongjuan waiji, the Shiwu yaoyi, and the Jingchuan tongyi. Yoon Haeng-im had his own method of interpreting these Confucian Classics and classical Chinese histories with the I Ching. On the one hand, while interpreting the Confucian Classics, Yoon Haeng-im selected phrases that he believed were needed to be explained in detail, and matched them with the corresponding passages in the I Ching. On the other hand, Yoon Haeng-im used excerpted passages from the I Ching to help to better understand classical Chinese histories such as the Summary of the Nineteen Histories. Furthermore, with the I Ching, he raised his doubts about some specific passages from these history books and argued whether or not these passages were written based on historical facts. The early interpretation of the Confucian Classics and classical Chinese histories was confirmed at King Jeongjo’s lecture on gyeongsa, called gyeongsa-gangui. In this lecture, there were a series of questions posed by the king about the Confucian Classics and histories, which were answered by his civil servants. The king and his civil servants believed that the I Ching was an essential precondition for the interpretation of gyeongsa. Yoon Haeng-im appears to have further developed this method of interpretation, resulting in him using his own methods to explain almost all of the Confucian Classics and histories in detail. This can be considered as an important criterion for understanding the characteristics of Yoon Haeng-im’s interpretation of gyeongsa. To conclude, in the history of the study of Confucian Classics, Yoon Haeng-im’s usage of the I Ching seems to have represented a paradigm of methods in interpreting the Confucian Classics and classical Chinese histories during the era of King Jeongjo.

영어초록

The I Ching is a central book that Yoon Haeng-im preferred to use, which can show his perspective on the study of Confucian Classics. In his essay Shinho-supil, with the I Ching, Yoon Haeng-im attempted to interpret a variety of Confucian Classics and histories (gyeongsa), such as the Analects, the Mencius, the Great Learning, the Doctrine of the Mean, the Shangshu, the Mao Odes, the Lesser Learning, the Book of Rites, the Zuo zhuan, the Summary of the Nineteen Histories, the Tongjuan waiji, the Shiwu yaoyi, and the Jingchuan tongyi. Yoon Haeng-im had his own method of interpreting these Confucian Classics and classical Chinese histories with the I Ching. On the one hand, while interpreting the Confucian Classics, Yoon Haeng-im selected phrases that he believed were needed to be explained in detail, and matched them with the corresponding passages in the I Ching. On the other hand, Yoon Haeng-im used excerpted passages from the I Ching to help to better understand classical Chinese histories such as the Summary of the Nineteen Histories. Furthermore, with the I Ching, he raised his doubts about some specific passages from these history books and argued whether or not these passages were written based on historical facts. The early interpretation of the Confucian Classics and classical Chinese histories was confirmed at King Jeongjo’s lecture on gyeongsa, called gyeongsa-gangui. In this lecture, there were a series of questions posed by the king about the Confucian Classics and histories, which were answered by his civil servants. The king and his civil servants believed that the I Ching was an essential precondition for the interpretation of gyeongsa. Yoon Haeng-im appears to have further developed this method of interpretation, resulting in him using his own methods to explain almost all of the Confucian Classics and histories in detail. This can be considered as an important criterion for understanding the characteristics of Yoon Haeng-im’s interpretation of gyeongsa. To conclude, in the history of the study of Confucian Classics, Yoon Haeng-im’s usage of the I Ching seems to have represented a paradigm of methods in interpreting the Confucian Classics and classical Chinese histories during the era of King Jeongjo.

참고자료

· 없음